Citation NR: 9712812
Decision Date: 04/15/97 Archive Date: 04/29/97
DOCKET NO. 95-21 498 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Hartford,
Connecticut
THE ISSUE
Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to
reopen the claim of service connection for a bladder
condition.
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Glenn A. Wasik, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active duty for training from October 1953 to
January 1954 and active duty from November 1954 to June 1955.
This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
on an appeal of a January 1995 rating decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).
REMAND
In November 1953 the veteran underwent cystoscopy and chronic
urethritis was diagnosed. When examined by VA in 1983, he
reported that he had been treated for urinary problems at
Loch Raven VAMC. It does not appear that an attempt has been
made to obtain medical records from this VA facility.
The veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned
member of the Board in March 1997. He stated that he was
injured while undergoing infiltration training at Fort
Benning. He reported that he received post-service treatment
for his bladder condition within one year of discharge from
Dr. Drake and then from Dr. Owens. The veteran indicated
that Dr. Drake was deceased. He did not know if treatment
records are available from this practitioner. He did
indicate that he thought treatment records were available
from Dr. Owens. The RO has not attempted to obtain these
treatment records.
The Board further notes that the last time the veteran was
afforded a VA examination was in January 1983. He testified
as to continuity of symptoms since his military service and
that his symptomatology has steadily increased in severity
since his release from service.
In order to accord the veteran every equitable consideration,
the case is REMANDED for the following development:
1. The RO should obtain the names and
addresses of all medical care providers
who treated the veteran for his bladder
condition. After securing the necessary
release, the RO should obtain those
records which are not already associated
with the claims file. The Board is
particularly interested in the treatment
records from the Loch Raven VAMC and from
Drs. Drake and Owens.
2. The veteran should be afforded a VA
examination by an appropriate specialist
to determine the nature, extent, severity
and etiology of the veteran's urinary
disorder. The claims folder must be made
available to the examiner for review
before the examination. The examiner
should elicit a detailed history from the
veteran of his urinary problems. The
examination should include any tests or
studies deemed necessary for an accurate
assessment. The examiner is asked to
render an opinion as to the likelihood
that any currently diagnosed urinary
disorder is related to any incident of
the veteran’s military service, to
include the chronic urethritis which was
diagnosed in 1953.
3. After the development requested above
has been completed to the extent
possible, the RO should again review the
record. If any benefit sought on appeal
remains denied, the appellant should be
furnished a supplemental statement of the
case and given the requisite opportunity
to respond thereto.
The case should then be returned to the Board for further
appellate consideration, if otherwise in order.
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO.
The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the
Board of Veterans’ Appeals or by the United States Court of
Veterans Appeals for additional development or other
appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.
See The Veterans’ Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L.
No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5101 (West Supp. 1996) (Historical and Statutory Notes).
In addition, VBA’s ADJUDICATION PROCEDURE MANUAL, M21-1, Part
IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all
cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court.
See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44-8.45 and 38.02-38.03.
GARY L. GICK
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
38 U.S.C.A. § 7102 (West Supp. 1996) permits a proceeding
instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual
member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has
been assigned to an individual member of the Board.
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of a
preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the
Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b)
(1996).
- 2 -